What Imagery Can't do and why Sketching Might Help

Abstract

The utility of enactment to overcome the limitations of imagery was investigated in three experiments using a paper- and pencil-sketching task. Novice sketchers were compared to experts. Subjects were briefly presented a configuration of several overlapping simple geometrical components and decided whether a succeeding figure formed part of it. Succeeding figures included novel parts, produced incidentally as a result of overlapping components. The ability to detect these novel parts by imagery alone was expected to be restricted. In the first experiment, forced sketching was compared to imagery-alone conditions. Forced sketching led to enhanced detection of the novel parts in expert-sketchers. By comparison, sketching had no influence on performance in novices. In the second experiment, subjects were given the option to sketch. Both novices and experts turned to spontaneous sketching in the case of novel parts, but only for experts detection of these parts was raised by it. The third experiment controlled for effects of memory load. Implications for the controversy about discovery in imagery are discussed.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anderson

R. E.

, & Helstrup

(1993a). Visual discovery in mind and on paper. Memory & Cognition, 21, 283–293.

Anderson

R. E.

, & Helstrup

(1993b). Multiple perspectives on discovery and creativity. In Roskos-Ewoldsen

Intons-Peterson

M. J.

, and Anderson

R. E.

(Eds.), Imagery, creativity and discovery: A cognitive perspective (Advances in Psychology, 98). Amsterdam: North Holland.

Chara

P. J.

, & Hamm

D. A.

(1989). An inquiry into the construct validity of the Vividness of Visual Imagery Questionnaire. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 69, 127–136.

Chambers

, & Reisberg

(1985). Can mental images be ambiguous? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 11, 317–328.

Ekstrom

R. B.

French

J. W.

, & Harman

H. H.

(1976). Kit of factor-referenced cognitive tests. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Ernest

C. H.

, & Paivio

(1971). Imagery and sex differences in incidental recall. British Journal of Psychology, 62, 67–72.

Finke

R. A.

(1990). Creative imagery: Discoveries and inventions in visualization. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Finke

R. A.

(1993). Mental imagery and creative discovery. In Rosuos-Ewoldsen

Intons-Peterson

M. J.

, & Anderson

R. E.

(Eds.), Imagery, creativity, and discovery: A cognitive perspective (Advances in Psychology, 98). Amsterdam: North Holland.

Finke

R. A.

Pinker

, & Farah

M. J.

(1989). Reinterpreting visual patterns in imagery. Cognitive Science, 13, 51–78.

10.

Finke

R. A.

, & Slayton

(1988). Explorations of creative visual synthesis in mental imagery. Memory & Cognition, 16, 252–257.

11.

Fish

, & Scrivener

(1990). Amplifying the mind's eye: Sketching and visual cognition. Leonardo, 23, 117–126.

12.

Ghiselin

(1952). The creative process. New York: American Library.

13.

Goldschmidt

(1991). The dialectics of sketching. Creativity Research Journal, 4(2), 123–143.

14.

Hadamard

(1949). The psychology of invention in the mathematical field. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

15.

Heydenreich

L. H.

Dibner

, & Reti

(1982). Leonardo the inventor. London: Hutchinson.

16.

Hyman

I. E.

(1993). Imagery, reconstructive memory and discovery. In Roskos-Ewoldsen

Intons-Peterson

M. J.

, & Anderson

R. E.

(Eds.), Imagery, creativity and discovery: A cognitive perspective (Advances in Psychology, 98). Amsterdam: North Holland.

17.

Jastrow

(1900). Fact and fable in psychology. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

18.

Kosslyn

S. M.

(1980). Image and mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

19.

Kunzendorf

R. G.

(1982). Mental images, appreciation of grammatical patterns, and creativity. Journal of Mental Imagery, 6, 183–201.

20.

Marks

D. F.

(1973). Visual imagery differences in the recall of pictures. British Journal of Psychology, 64, 17–24.

21.

Peterson

Kihlstrom

Rose

, & Glisky

(1992). Mental images can be ambiguous; Parts, wholes, and strategies. Memory & Cognition, 20, 107–223.

22.

Raven

J. C.

(1988). Advanced Progressive Matrices. Set II.

23.

Reed

S. K.

, & Johnsen

J. A.

(1975). Detection of parts in patterns and images. Memory & Cognition, 3, 569–575.

24.

Reisberg

, & Chambers

(1991). Neither pictures nor propositions: What can we learn from a mental image? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 45, 288–302.

25.

Reisberg

, & Logie

(1993). The ins and outs of working memory. In Roskos-Ewoldsen

Intons-Peterson

M. J.

, & Anderson

R. E.

(Eds.), Imagery, creativity and discovery: A cognitive perspective (Advances in Psychology, 98). Amsterdam: North Holland.

26.

Shepard

R. N.

(1978). Externalization of mental images and the act of creation. In Randhawa

B. S.

& Coffman

W. E.

(Eds.), Visual learning, thinking and communication (pp. 133–189). NY: Academic Press.

27.

Smith

S. M.

Ward

T. B.

, & Finke

R. A.

(1995). The creative cognition approach. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

28.

van Leeuwen

Steyvers

, & Nooter

(1997). Stability and intermittency in large-scale coupled oscillator models for perceptual segmentation. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 41(4), 319–344.

29.

Verstijnen

I. M.

van Leeuwen

Goldschmidt

Hamel

, & Hennessey

J. M.

(1998). Creative discovery in imagery and perception: Combining is relatively easy, restructuring takes a sketch. Acta Psychologica, 99(2), 177–200.

30.

Witkin

H. A.

Oltman

P. K.

Raskin

, & Karp

S. A.

(1971). A manual for the embedded figures tests. Consulting Psychologists Press.